Planned Parenthood Appears OK With Sex-Selection Abortions

How would Americans react to find out that the nation’s biggest abortion business is fine with women coming through the doors of its clinics and arranging an abortion merely because the gender of their unborn children is not what the women preferred.

The Planned Parenthood abortion business believes it has become the subject of another undercover investigation spearheaded by Live Action, which has exposed its willingness to help sex traffickers arrange abortions for their victims. This time, Planned Parenthood thinks Live Action is sending undercover investigators to determine whether or not its staff would facilitate abortions as a means of determining the sex of a child.

When Planned Parenthood went to the liberal Huffington Post to try to do damage control before the results of any possible Live Action investigation are made public, Planned Parenthood spokesperson Chloe Cooney made it appear the abortion business would be fine with sex-selection abortions.

“Decisions about whether to choose adoption, end the pregnancy or to raise a child have to be left up to a woman, her family and her faith, with the counsel of her doctor,” Cooney said.

Further, Planned Parenthood didn’t say a word about forced abortions or sex-selection abortions that take place in China as the world watched last week while Chen Guangcheng escaped house arrest and sought support from the United States.

Now, Americans United for Life attorney Anna Franzonello, in a new column at the Washington Times, provides more evidence showing Planned Parenthood may be willing to tolerate such gender-based abortions.

For example, in opposition to a Missouri bill that would ban sex-selection abortions, a Planned Parenthood lobbyist recently testified that the organization “condemns” sex-selection abortions. However, when a legislator asked her to answer whether Planned Parenthood would refuse to perform such abortions if asked by a patient, she dodged the question with political rhetoric. Three times she refused to answer the question, even when asked directly to give a “yes or no” response. Americans United for Life was there, testifying against the discrimination against women inherent in sex-selection abortions.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Leslie Kantor and Dr. Carolyn Westhoff penned an article in which they, too, claimed the abortion chain “condemns” sex selection. However, their article also tellingly admits, “That doesn’t mean we always agree with the decisions made by people who seek our help.” Thus, it appears that in Planned Parenthood-speak, “condemnation” of sex selection does not include “will not participate” in the abortion.

As reported by the Huffington Post, “None of [Planned Parenthood‘s] clinics will deny a woman an abortion based on her reasons for wanting one, except in those states that explicitly prohibit sex-selection abortion.”

Franzonello suggests Planned Parenthood, if it turns out to have been a subject of another undercover expose’, will likely dismiss the probe as biased and misleading rather than answer the charge that it tacitly supports sex-selection abortions.

Predicting the outcome of rumored current investigations, Planned Parenthood has said, “We expect that the materials eventually released will focus on Planned Parenthood’s nonjudgmental discussions with the various women who posed as possible patients [seeking sex-selection abortions].”

Employing the term “nonjudgmental,” Planned Parenthood hopes that readers will think “innocuous” and move on. But step back a second. Think about what “nonjudgmental” is being applied to: “discussions” about killing a baby girl because she is female. Not “judging” gender-based killing is taking a side.

Moreover, engaging in “nonjudgmental” discussions about sex selection undermines Planned Parenthood’s assertion that “Gender bias is contrary to everything our organization works for daily in communities across the country.” The veracity of Planned Parenthood’s statement that it “finds the concept of sex selection deeply unsettling” should be found in any of its “discussions” about sex selection.

The mere fact that Planned Parenthood is mounting a public relations campaign before new allegations of bad behaviors casts doubt on those claims. If Planned Parenthood’s “discussions” were in accord with mainstream American values that reject gender-based killing, it would have nothing to fear from their public release. There would be no story to get in front of, no need for damage control.

What is important, though, is that Planned Parenthood’s participation in this war on women does not end with its “nonjudgmental” discussions. Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, appears willing to carry out sex-selection abortions.

Life News talked with Rose, who said her group can’t confirm whether they are currently engaging in any undercover investigations focusing on the abortion business.

CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!

“Live Action’s policy is not to comment on or confirm ongoing investigative research until its conclusion and public release,” she said.

If Live Action is indeed conducting another investigation, Planned Parenthood’s attempt here to head off the results before the organization releases them would not mark the first occasion on which it attempted to do so. Planned Parenthood representatives spoke with the Washington Post just a short time before Live Action released the sex trafficking videos showing Planned Parenthood staffers arranging abortions for victims. The abortion business also spoke with the Washington Post to put its spin on the breaking of the story of Komen for the Cure cutting its funding — causing a massive backlash and an eventual reversal in its decision.

A handful of states specifically prohibit sex-selection abortions — Arizona, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Illinois — and a potential investigation would potentially expose Planned Parenthood to criminal prosecution in those states if it is indeed allowing abortions to be done to determine gender.

If Planned Parenthood is indeed arranging sex-selection abortions for women and couples who want boy babies over girls, the further public damage to its tenuous reputation may be hard to calculate.